This article describes a multilevel theoretical framework that examines the multiple causes of corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting in the social environment of business. We argue that substantive and/or symbolic reporting flows from individual‐, aggregate‐, organizational‐, and institution‐level phenomena, and is thus a complex outcome of CSR and corporate social performance (CSP). Theoretical lenses range from reinforcement theory at the microlevel to legitimacy and stakeholder theories at the macrolevel, and include a discussion of the emergence of lower‐level CSR‐relevant characteristics to (...) higher level constructs. Our goal is to clarify how this behavior develops from microlevel, mesolevel, and macrolevel processes with a view toward assisting corporations to better enact CSR reporting, and their stakeholders to effectively promote substantive reporting behavior. (shrink)

Integrating stakeholder agency theory with the instrumental corporate social responsibility (CSR) literature, this study explores how award-winning CEOs consider personal interests and balance competing stakeholder demands when they decide between external and internal CSR, or CSR focus. Using a difference-in-differences research design, we find that after winning a prestigious media award, CEOs engage in more external CSR, which is more visible to the public, and less internal CSR, which is less likely to attract public attention. We find that such an (...) influence on CSR focus is more salient for award-winning CEOs with lower stock ownership (i.e. a stronger self-serving motivation) than for CEOs with higher stock ownership. Furthermore, we explore the role of stakeholder salience in modifying award-winning CEOs’ decisions about CSR focus. When external stakeholder salience is higher (e.g. higher media coverage), award-winning CEOs' manipulation of CSR focus by increasing external CSR and decreasing internal CSR is more salient. However, such effects can be dampened when internal stakeholder salience is higher (e.g. higher human capital intensity). Our study contributes to the instrumental CSR literature by demonstrating the underlying processes and boundary conditions of how awards affect CEOs' balance of stakeholder salience. (shrink)

This article examines whether economic performance could affect EID and how the relationship is determined by the form of ownership from voluntarism to regulation under the current Chinese context. In this study, our empirical results show that the relationship between firms’ performance and EID is complex and the interactive impact of ownership and economic performance on EID significantly varies from voluntary disclosure to mandatory disclosure. This study provides a more comprehensive understanding of the motivations in corporate EID. The performance–impression theory (...) can be used to explain the disclosure behaviors during the period of voluntary disclosure, while the pressure–legitimacy theory can be used during the period of mandatory disclosure. The finding suggests that when evaluating corporate EID associated with economic performance in emerging economies such as China, it needs to be cautious, as which tends to vary with the form of ownership and whether there is any mandatory regulation in place. (shrink)

Prior research suggests that voluntary environmental governance mechanisms operate to enhance a firm’s environmental legitimacy as opposed to being a driver of proactive environmental performance activities. To understand how these mechanisms contribute to the firm’s environmental legitimacy, we investigate whether environmental corporate governance characteristics are associated with voluntary environmental disclosure. We examine an increasingly important attribute of a firm’s disclosure setting, namely the disclosure of greenhouse gas (GHG) information. GHG information represents proprietary non-financial information about the firm’s exposure to environmental (...) concerns and is related to the firm’s operations and future profitability. Thus, we expect governance participants would view such information as a potentially important strategic device for managing stakeholders’ demands for information concerning environmental risks. We find that the presence of an environmental committee and a Chief Sustainability Officer (CSO) is positively associated with the likelihood of GHG disclosure and that CSOs are associated with disclosure transparency. Further analysis reveals that the likelihood of disclosure is associated with committee size, number of committee meetings, expertise of committee members and CSO, and overlap between the environmental committee and audit committee. Only expertise of the environmental committee members and the CSO are associated with GHG disclosure transparency, while larger committees tend to be associated with lower transparency. Our results are particularly important to those with interests in evaluating the potential role that corporate governance mechanisms play in responding to stakeholder concerns about environmental risks. Directors and officers who are considering appointment to similar governance positions, may wish to consider what attributes would make such governance positions more influential. (shrink)